There's only 26 posts to go, the race is on
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
test please delete
Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
Collapse
-
-
In response, Boeing produced Model 464, a smaller four-engine version with a 230,000 pound (105,000 kg) gross weight, which was briefly deemed acceptable.How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't thinkComment
-
Comment
-
Then, in November 1946, the Deputy Chief of Air Staff for Research and Development Curtis LeMay expressed the desire for a cruise speed of 400 miles per hour (345 kn, 645 km/h), to which Boeing responded with a 300,000 pound (140,000 kg) aircraft.How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't thinkComment
-
-
Originally posted by DiscoStu View PostI wonder if Faqqer is lurking, waiting to jump in on post 23000?How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't thinkComment
-
In December 1946, Boeing was asked to change their design to a four-engine bomber with a top speed of 400 miles per hour, range of 12,000 statute miles (10,000 nmi, 19,000 km), and the ability to carry a nuclear weapon. The aircraft could weigh up to 480,000 pounds (220,000 kg).How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't thinkComment
-
Originally posted by Troll View Postsee who's logged on & report back!!ǝןqqıʍComment
-
Boeing responded with two models powered by the T-35 turboprops. The Model 464-16 was a "nuclear-only" bomber with a 10,000 pound payload, while the Model 464-17 was a general purpose bomber with a 90,000 pound (40,000 kg) payload.How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't thinkComment
-
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Expert Accounting for Contractors: Trusted by thousands Dec 12 14:47
- Finish the song lyric Dec 12 12:05
- A quick read of the taxman’s Spotlight 67 may not be enough Dec 12 09:27
- Contractor MVL Solution from SFP Dec 11 12:53
- Gary Lineker and HMRC broker IR35 settlement on the hush Dec 11 09:10
- IT contractor jobs market sinks to four-year low in November Dec 10 09:30
- Joke of the Day Dec 9 14:57
- How company directors can offset employer NIC rising to 15% Dec 9 10:30
- Contractors, seen Halifax’s 18-month fixed rate remortgage? Dec 5 09:59
- Contractors, don’t be fooled by HMRC Spotlight 67 on MSCs Dec 4 09:20
Comment